Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cupertino council directs rewrite of Economic Development Committee rules, sets annual commissioner terms
Summary
After months of planning, the Cupertino City Council voted 3–2 to ask staff to return with an amended ordinance changing the Economic Development Committee’s membership and setting one‑year commissioner appointments to avoid mismatched four‑year commission terms.
The Cupertino City Council voted to send an amended ordinance back to staff that would change how the Economic Development Committee is composed and how long commissioner representatives serve. The motion, made by Mayor Chow Chao and seconded by Vice Mayor Moore, passed 3–2 with Council members Mohan and Wong voting no.
Council members said the changes respond to an administrative mismatch: commissioners serve staggered four‑year terms while commission appointments to committee seats are typically made annually. Staff and the city clerk recommended adjusting committee terms so commissioners appointed to the Economic Development Committee serve one‑year terms, allowing commissions to nominate representatives each year rather than tying committee membership to the longer commission term.
Proponents, including Mayor Chao and several commissioners who spoke, said adding a representative from the Planning Commission would strengthen land‑use input for economic development and that including commissioners from Sustainability, Technology Information & Communications (TIC), and Parks and Recreation would broaden expertise. The mayor floated expanding the committee to 11 members (industry representatives, at‑large seats, commissioners and council representation) but councilors negotiated a smaller change during deliberations.
Opponents said a larger committee risks being unwieldy and could impede work because of quorum and staff‑capacity issues. Council member Mohan and Council member Wong argued for a smaller, more nimble body made mainly of industry representatives and at‑large members, and warned that adding many members would increase staff workload and reduce effectiveness. Concerns raised during the public comment period mirrored those points: members of the public and the Sustainability Commission urged the council to retain sustainability representation, while at least one speaker recommended using at‑large community members instead of commissioners to limit burden on staff.
Council amendment and vote: Council amended the ordinance to set the committee composition to include one council member and three commissioner representatives (one each from Planning, Sustainability and TIC), with those commissioner seats set to one‑year terms; the remainder of the committee structure (industry sector representatives and at‑large seats as described in existing ordinance language) was left in place. Council instructed the city attorney to revise the ordinance and return it for a formal first reading on July 1, with a second reading set for July 15. The motion to return the ordinance as amended passed 3–2.
Next steps: Staff will prepare the revised ordinance reflecting the one‑year commissioner terms and the amended composition and return it for the scheduled first reading on July 1. If the ordinance is modified after the first reading, the council noted that another first reading would be required, restarting the ordinance process.
